There are some very obvious reasons for using images in your pages or copy. On a basic level, they add variation to an otherwise monochrome page and break down the copy into more accessible chunks. After all, who wants to read a thousand words of block copy? But, of course, photos are far more compelling than that. We are visual animals. Nearly every thought we have is held as an image in our minds and images have been our main process of communication for thousands of years. By comparison, the written word has been a mere blip.
A picture can be so much more than words. The colors can effect our emotions, the content can make us chuckle or gasp, the context can persuade us to trust or disbelieve. Words and pictures use different mental processes - letters must be mentally reconstructed into words which then are required to be interpreted before they can be understood, whereas pictures are hot-wired straight into our consciousness.
In fact really great images seem to defy words altogether. Our response to them is direct - almost visceral - rather than intellectual. Little wonder then, that photographs are used everywhere to instantly portray those feelings and emotions that a thousand words could not adequately describe. How many words would you need to recreate the image of the soldiers raising the stars and stripes at Iwo Jima, Spencer Rowell's classic image of a bare torsoed man cradling a vulnerable child in his arms, or that unknown man, with his shopping bags in hand, blocking the Chinese tanks just outside Tiananmen Square? And how poor would that description be, compared to just showing the photo?
Images that are produced for publication usually fall into three categories. The first, and most obvious is that of identyifier. They are there mainly to show that something, or someone really exists. In the media they appear as small headshots, or product shots. They usually get hardy any attention from either the editor or the reader and have often been shot to a set blueprint - blue or green background - and showing a stare something between a knowing smile and look of abject fear. This is because PR managers often just want to broadcast a single photo designed - they think - to be used in all eventualities. If you just mail out out one image, then it can't be too happy, or sad, or indeed anything, just in case. This seems to me to be a complete waste. If you have employed a photographer, he will have a good choice of images for you to choose from. Why not select half a dozen and send them all out? Picture editors appreciate a choice and aren't likely to use them incorrectly. The same argument applies to product shots. There may well be a best shot, but give a selection so that they can change the images around occasionally or crop them to different shapes.
Shooting these portraits against a dull background also misses a chance. Whilst picture editors will keep away from headshots with obvious logos in the background, or a letter sticking out of your head, there is no reason why you can't be photographed in context. If you make widgets, why not be photographed in the manufacturing area?, However, general office shots aren't effective because one office looks very like another - it does nothing to explain what you do or who you are. Standing in an office infront of a logo or banner is the worst thing to do. Good pictures will actually effect where the article will appear. Remember an ordinary article with good pictures will often get a better show than an ordinary article with ordinary images.
The second kind of picture is the eyecatcher or dramatic moment. Present in every newspaper and magazine, these images allow you, the viewer, to witness a precise event. It is a moment in time which, ironically, if you had been present you might well have overlooked. As if to emphasize this, the subjects are usually in off the ground or in mid motion and there is often eye contact with the the viewer which only enhances the feeling of connectedness and immediacy. These pictures are designed to suck you in and engage with you. In other words, these astonishing pictures are used by publications to pull you in, past the headlines and the stand-first, to the copy.
In terms of company images, the eyecatchers will always have currency. Movement is always going to attract attention, but unusual context will also catch the eye. Whether it is a bike in mid air or a suited gent in high heels on a station platform, you can't help but notice it. The abnormal in every day life contains an air of mystery that we can't resist. However, remember that the image should reflect your corporate values and that what might seem funny to your work colleagues, might mean nothing to your potential clients. Always think about how the picture is constructed: follow natural perspective by putting the subject in the middle of the image, surrounded by the supporting elements. Remember that eye contact is attractive and make the picture engaging by either having the subject coming towards the viewer, or shoot over a shoulder, to pull the viewer into the image.
The third kind of image which we are all so used to seeing is the feature picture. The feature picture is different from the portrait because it aims to place the article or subject in a certain surrounding or context and it is different from the eyecatcher because there is no doubt that the photographer (and possibly the subject) have worked to manufacture the context. These photos don't pretend to be a moment in time, they want to tell their story all by themselves.
In that sense they are reminiscent of some of the portraits by the great masters. When a man was painted for posterity, he wanted to leave the viewer with a a certain image imprinted in your mind. It wasn't a quick snap - it would take months to complete and hang in pride of place in his house. It wasn't just an image, it was confirmation of his status. Each element had been thought out and gave a clear message to the initiated. The content will depend upon who has the final word. If the subject is powerful enough to set the terms, it will usually indicate what they think of themselves and their achievements. If the commissioning editor has influence, then it will tend to fit the story which is written around it.
However the feature picture doesn't have to have an ego at the centre. The essential element of a feature picture is manufacture. The photographer has changed the context or parameters so that he can better tell the story. He has taken the pieces he thinks are important and arranged them so that the viewer will be led through the picture in a specific way so that the story is shown in a specific order. In making these decisions, he has also thought about format, style, lighting and colour saturation as well as content. And so as a consequence, feature pictures tend to be more artistic in nature and stand up to scrutiny for a longer time. Because so much forethought has been put into them, good feature photographs can be studied just like the Old Masters.
A picture can be so much more than words. The colors can effect our emotions, the content can make us chuckle or gasp, the context can persuade us to trust or disbelieve. Words and pictures use different mental processes - letters must be mentally reconstructed into words which then are required to be interpreted before they can be understood, whereas pictures are hot-wired straight into our consciousness.
In fact really great images seem to defy words altogether. Our response to them is direct - almost visceral - rather than intellectual. Little wonder then, that photographs are used everywhere to instantly portray those feelings and emotions that a thousand words could not adequately describe. How many words would you need to recreate the image of the soldiers raising the stars and stripes at Iwo Jima, Spencer Rowell's classic image of a bare torsoed man cradling a vulnerable child in his arms, or that unknown man, with his shopping bags in hand, blocking the Chinese tanks just outside Tiananmen Square? And how poor would that description be, compared to just showing the photo?
Images that are produced for publication usually fall into three categories. The first, and most obvious is that of identyifier. They are there mainly to show that something, or someone really exists. In the media they appear as small headshots, or product shots. They usually get hardy any attention from either the editor or the reader and have often been shot to a set blueprint - blue or green background - and showing a stare something between a knowing smile and look of abject fear. This is because PR managers often just want to broadcast a single photo designed - they think - to be used in all eventualities. If you just mail out out one image, then it can't be too happy, or sad, or indeed anything, just in case. This seems to me to be a complete waste. If you have employed a photographer, he will have a good choice of images for you to choose from. Why not select half a dozen and send them all out? Picture editors appreciate a choice and aren't likely to use them incorrectly. The same argument applies to product shots. There may well be a best shot, but give a selection so that they can change the images around occasionally or crop them to different shapes.
Shooting these portraits against a dull background also misses a chance. Whilst picture editors will keep away from headshots with obvious logos in the background, or a letter sticking out of your head, there is no reason why you can't be photographed in context. If you make widgets, why not be photographed in the manufacturing area?, However, general office shots aren't effective because one office looks very like another - it does nothing to explain what you do or who you are. Standing in an office infront of a logo or banner is the worst thing to do. Good pictures will actually effect where the article will appear. Remember an ordinary article with good pictures will often get a better show than an ordinary article with ordinary images.
The second kind of picture is the eyecatcher or dramatic moment. Present in every newspaper and magazine, these images allow you, the viewer, to witness a precise event. It is a moment in time which, ironically, if you had been present you might well have overlooked. As if to emphasize this, the subjects are usually in off the ground or in mid motion and there is often eye contact with the the viewer which only enhances the feeling of connectedness and immediacy. These pictures are designed to suck you in and engage with you. In other words, these astonishing pictures are used by publications to pull you in, past the headlines and the stand-first, to the copy.
In terms of company images, the eyecatchers will always have currency. Movement is always going to attract attention, but unusual context will also catch the eye. Whether it is a bike in mid air or a suited gent in high heels on a station platform, you can't help but notice it. The abnormal in every day life contains an air of mystery that we can't resist. However, remember that the image should reflect your corporate values and that what might seem funny to your work colleagues, might mean nothing to your potential clients. Always think about how the picture is constructed: follow natural perspective by putting the subject in the middle of the image, surrounded by the supporting elements. Remember that eye contact is attractive and make the picture engaging by either having the subject coming towards the viewer, or shoot over a shoulder, to pull the viewer into the image.
The third kind of image which we are all so used to seeing is the feature picture. The feature picture is different from the portrait because it aims to place the article or subject in a certain surrounding or context and it is different from the eyecatcher because there is no doubt that the photographer (and possibly the subject) have worked to manufacture the context. These photos don't pretend to be a moment in time, they want to tell their story all by themselves.
In that sense they are reminiscent of some of the portraits by the great masters. When a man was painted for posterity, he wanted to leave the viewer with a a certain image imprinted in your mind. It wasn't a quick snap - it would take months to complete and hang in pride of place in his house. It wasn't just an image, it was confirmation of his status. Each element had been thought out and gave a clear message to the initiated. The content will depend upon who has the final word. If the subject is powerful enough to set the terms, it will usually indicate what they think of themselves and their achievements. If the commissioning editor has influence, then it will tend to fit the story which is written around it.
However the feature picture doesn't have to have an ego at the centre. The essential element of a feature picture is manufacture. The photographer has changed the context or parameters so that he can better tell the story. He has taken the pieces he thinks are important and arranged them so that the viewer will be led through the picture in a specific way so that the story is shown in a specific order. In making these decisions, he has also thought about format, style, lighting and colour saturation as well as content. And so as a consequence, feature pictures tend to be more artistic in nature and stand up to scrutiny for a longer time. Because so much forethought has been put into them, good feature photographs can be studied just like the Old Masters.
About the Author:
Jim McGrath has worked in the media industry forover two decades. He has a specific interest in digital photography and good cameras. Learn more about the best digital SLRs at his camerawize website.
Post a Comment